M/S SOCIETY FOR PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH IN ASIA,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (E), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 Society For Participatory Research In Vs. Income Tax Officer(E), Trust Ward-Iii, Asia, 42,Tughlakabad Instutional Area, New Delhi New Delhi Gir/Pan : Aaats1994H (Appellant) (Respondent)

charitable purpose defined in section 2(15) of the Act and therefore, benefit of section 11 and 12 of the Act was not allowed to the appellant in the instant year. 4.2 On appeal, the CIT(A) upheld the denial of exemption by holding as under: “3.1 To verify the claim of the appellant, I have gone through the Schedule

SOCIETY FOR PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH IN ASIA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO (E), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stand allowed

trust or institution is relief of the poor, education or medical relief, it will constitute ‘charitable purpose’ even if it incidentally involves the carrying on of commercial activities. 2.2 ‘Relief of the poor’ encompasses a wide range of objects for the welfare of the economically and socially disadvantaged or needy. It will, therefore, include within its ambit purposes such

S.J.A. ALUMNI ASSOCIATION,,DEHRADUN vs. CIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agarwal & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

trust or institution has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard." There is a provision for canceling of registration granted under section 12AA of the Act. The assessee made the impugned application for renewal 5.5. under section 8oG(s)(vi) of the Act. However, the competent authority, the Ld. CIT, failed to take appropriate action in the matter within

DLF LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

272 (Delhi) has held that “29. Sub-section (2) of Section 14 A of the said Act provides the manner in which the Assessing Officer is to determine the amount of expenditure incurred in relation to income which does not form part of the total income. However, if we examine the provision carefully, we would find that the Assessing Officer

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S DLF LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

272 (Delhi) has held that “29. Sub-section (2) of Section 14 A of the said Act provides the manner in which the Assessing Officer is to determine the amount of expenditure incurred in relation to income which does not form part of the total income. However, if we examine the provision carefully, we would find that the Assessing Officer

ADIT (E), NEW DELHI vs. HAMDARD NATION FOUNDATION (INDIA), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

charitable purpose, may not be denied in view of the aforesaid violation of provisions of section 13(2)(b) r.w.s. 13(3) of the Act. In response to the show cause notice, the AR of the assessee submitted as under : “Please refer your letter dated 9.10.2009 pointing out that the rent received from the following properties : (a). Property

DCIT, CIRCLE- 8(1), NEW DELHI vs. EBIX SOFTWARE INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

272- 328 of Paper Book)) That subsequently on 1.6.2012, the company entered into a business transfer agreement (copy placed at pages 106-116 of Paper Book) with M/s. Planet Online (P) Ltd. to purchase the business undertakings for a consideration of Rs.38,53,50,000/- (USD 7 miilion) as on going concern on slump sale basis. The business undertakings comprised

DCIT, EXEMPTION- CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. ALIGARH DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (ADA) , ALIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing] Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dcit, Vs. Aligarh Development Exemption Circle, Authority (Ada), Ghaziabad Ramghat Road, Aligarh Up Pan: Aaala0082G (Appellant) (Respondent)

272/- should have been utilized during the year. Thus, there is a shortfall of Rs. 15,41,99,970/-. The appellant has produced a copy of form-10 filed on 30.09.2014 which shows that an amount of Rs. 15,41,99,970/- has been requested to be carried forward for utilization in subsequent years. Thus, all the requirements for claiming

INNOVATIVE WELFARE AND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,GR. NOIDA vs. ADIT (E), TRUST CIRCLE, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri N. K. Choudhryito(Exemption), Vs. Innovative Welfare & Ward-1(2), Educational Society, New Delhi Regd. Office: B-19, Defence Colony, New Delhi Pan: Aaati4207R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Trust Circle, Regd. Office: B-19, Defence New Delhi Colony, New Delhi PAN: AAATI4207R (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri Hemant Gupta, Ld. Sr. DR Assessee by: Shri Rohit Kapoor, Ld. CA Shri Vir Aggarwal, Ld. Adv Date of Hearing 14/03/2022 Date of pronouncement 29/04/2022 O R D E R PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, J. M.: 1. The instant Appeals

INNOVATIVE WELFARE AND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,GR. NOIDA vs. ADIT (E), TRUST CIRCLE, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri N. K. Choudhryito(Exemption), Vs. Innovative Welfare & Ward-1(2), Educational Society, New Delhi Regd. Office: B-19, Defence Colony, New Delhi Pan: Aaati4207R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Trust Circle, Regd. Office: B-19, Defence New Delhi Colony, New Delhi PAN: AAATI4207R (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri Hemant Gupta, Ld. Sr. DR Assessee by: Shri Rohit Kapoor, Ld. CA Shri Vir Aggarwal, Ld. Adv Date of Hearing 14/03/2022 Date of pronouncement 29/04/2022 O R D E R PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, J. M.: 1. The instant Appeals

ITO (EXEMPTIONS), NEW DELHI vs. M/S. INNOVATIVE WELFARE AND EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri N. K. Choudhryito(Exemption), Vs. Innovative Welfare & Ward-1(2), Educational Society, New Delhi Regd. Office: B-19, Defence Colony, New Delhi Pan: Aaati4207R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Trust Circle, Regd. Office: B-19, Defence New Delhi Colony, New Delhi PAN: AAATI4207R (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri Hemant Gupta, Ld. Sr. DR Assessee by: Shri Rohit Kapoor, Ld. CA Shri Vir Aggarwal, Ld. Adv Date of Hearing 14/03/2022 Date of pronouncement 29/04/2022 O R D E R PER N.K. CHOUDHRY, J. M.: 1. The instant Appeals

ADIT (E), DELHI vs. M/S ALL INDIA KATARIA EDUCATION SOCIETY,, NEW DELHI

In the result Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu, J.M. & Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am

272 (Chennai) Madras ‘D’ Bench of ITAT (ii) ACIT vs. Balaji Educational & Charitable Public Trust (2011), 15 taxmann.com 53 (Mad.) (iii) CIT-IV, N.Del vs. Dharam Pal Prem Chand Ltd., 295 ITR 105 (Del) (iv) ITO vs. Pawan Kumar Gupta (2011), 43 SOT 32 in ITA 4690/Del/2009 Delhi ‘F’ Bench of ITAT (v) M/s Andaman Timber vs. Commissioner of Central

RAKESH VAID,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 62(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, assessee’s appeal, ITA no

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2010-11]

272/- do not in any way reflect their under: “We think that the section makes it genuineness or their purpose. The details of clear that the entry can be rejected if the bonus paid to the employees also explanation offered by the assessee can be contradictory in as far as the statement of rejected by the Income-tax Officer

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CB RICHARD ELLIS SOUTH ASIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Charitable Trust 308 ITR 161 vi) That burden was upon the Assessing Officer and not on the assessee to establish that, what had been paid by way of commission would have been payable by way of dividend, which on the facts of appellant remains undischarged vii) That since there existed no statutory requirement under the Income

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. C.B. RICHARD ELLIS SOUTH ASIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Charitable Trust 308 ITR 161 vi) That burden was upon the Assessing Officer and not on the assessee to establish that, what had been paid by way of commission would have been payable by way of dividend, which on the facts of appellant remains undischarged vii) That since there existed no statutory requirement under the Income

MOVEMENT AGAINST DIABETES AND ENDOCRINE DISORDERS,NEW DELHI vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee stands allowed accordingly

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2019-20

272 payments have been made in June 2019 In respect of the payments the applicant has stated that "During the course of deficiency a wunber of medical professionals were engaged The copies of the documents of work undertaken by them are enclosed herewith" Sample case studies furnished by the applicant can at best we consider as Clinical Research, which

MOHAN S LAKHANI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER & ANR

Section 7 of the General Clauses Act to operate. In these circumstances the notice issued after the period of limitation could not be held against the assessee as done by the CIT(Appeals) which rejected the appeal. Consequently, following the previous rulings of this Court, [i.e. Shyam Gopal Charitable Trust V. Director of Income

SH. VIRENDER KHANNA,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Assessment Year : 2009-10

Charitable Trust for advertisement of his organization by display of hoarding at the venue of concert organized by them. Copy of pamphlets and bank statement were also given. The AO refused to grant any deduction because the donation paid by the assessee to this organization was not supported by any 10 certificate issued for the purposes of section